Quality-of-life outcomes and risk prediction for patients randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs nivolumab on LungMAP-S1400I.

BACKGROUND: An important issue for patients with cancer treated with novel therapeutics is how they weigh the effects of treatment on survival and quality of life (QOL). We compared QOL in patients enrolled to SWOG S1400I, a substudy of the LungMAP biomarker-driven master protocol. METHODS: SWOG S1400I was a randomized phase III trial comparing nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs nivolumab for treatment of immunotherapy-naïve disease in advanced squamous cell lung cancer. The primary endpoint was the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer severity score at week 7 and week 13 with a target difference of 1.0 points, assessed using multivariable linear regression. A composite risk model for progression-free and overall survival was derived using best-subset selection. RESULTS: Among 158 evaluable patients, median age was 67.6 years and most were male (66.5%). The adjusted MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer severity score was 0.04 points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.44 to 0.51 points; P = .89) at week 7 and 0.12 points (95% CI = -0.41 to 0.65; P = .66) at week 13. A composite risk model showed that patients with high levels of appetite loss and shortness of breath had a threefold increased risk of progression or death (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.06, 95% CI = 1.88 to 4.98; P < .001) and that those with high levels of both appetite loss and work limitations had a fivefold increased risk of death (HR = 5.60, 95% CI = 3.27 to 9.57; P < .001)-compared with those with neither risk category. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of a benefit of ipilimumab added to nivolumab compared with nivolumab alone for QOL in S1400I. A risk model identified patients at high risk of poor survival, demonstrating the prognostic relevance of baseline patient-reported outcomes even in those with previously treated advanced cancer.

A prospective study to validate the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) for epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRI)-induced dermatologic toxicities FACT-EGFRI 18 questionnaire: SWOG S1013.

BACKGROUND: Papulopustular rash is a common class effect of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRI) that can affect patients' health-related quality of life and cause disruptions to treatment. SWOG S1013 (NCT01416688) is a multi-center study designed to validate the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy EGFRI 18 (FACT-EGFRI 18) using 7-items from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 to assess EGFRI-induced skin-related toxicities and their impact on functional status. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of colorectal or lung cancer to receive EGFRI therapies for at least 6 weeks were enrolled. Patient self-assessments using the FACT-EGFRI 18 were completed prior to undergoing CTCAE assessment by trained clinicians at baseline, weekly × 6, and then monthly × 3. The psychometric properties of the FACT-EGFRI 14 (skin toxicity items only) and 18 (plus 2 nail and 2 hair items) were established based on criterion validity, known groups validity, internal consistency reliability, and responsiveness to change. RESULTS: Of the 146 registered patients, 124 were evaluable. High Cronbach's alpha (> 0.70) for both FACT-EGFRI 14 and FACT-EGFRI 18 scores across assessment times were observed. Although agreement (i.e. criterion validity) between individual and summary scales of the FACT-EGFRI 18 for assessing skin toxicity was good, agreement with the clinician-reported CTCAE was only fair. The minimal important difference was determined to be 3 points. The results also demonstrated responsiveness to symptom change. DISCUSSION: Based on the results of this multi-center validation study, the FACT-EGFRI 18 patient-reported outcome instrument provided data from the patient's perspective yielding unique information as well as complementing clinician-rated CTCAE grades, especially for the symptoms of pain, pruritus, and paronychia. CONCLUSIONS: Good to excellent psychometric properties for the FACT-EGFRI 18 were demonstrated, supporting further use of this patient-reported outcomes measure. Additional validation with a more diverse group of patients should be conducted.

Association between body mass index and response to duloxetine for aromatase inhibitor-associated musculoskeletal symptoms in SWOG S1202.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-associated musculoskeletal symptoms (AIMSS) negatively impact adherence to and persistence with therapy. In SWOG S1202, patients with AIMSS who were treated with duloxetine, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, reported improvement in pain by 12 weeks compared with placebo. Based on the authors' prior observation that responses to pain interventions differ between obese and nonobese patients, the current study examined whether response to duloxetine therapy differed by obesity status. METHODS: In SWOG S1202, a total of 299 AI-treated postmenopausal women with stage I to III (AJCC 7th Edition) breast cancer who developed new or worsening average pain were enrolled, randomized to duloxetine or placebo, and treated for 12 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes were obtained at baseline and through 12 weeks. Patients were categorized into nonobese (body mass index [BMI] <30 kg/m2 ) or obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2 ). The authors tested the interaction between intervention and obesity with respect to average pain at 12 weeks in the 289 eligible patients, using a P value of .05 to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: In approximately 54% of evaluable patients with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 , the reduction in the mean average pain score between baseline and 12 weeks was statistically significantly greater for patients treated with duloxetine compared with those receiving placebo (-2.73 vs -1.64 points; P = .003). Conversely, in the nonobese patients, the reduction in the mean average pain score was similar in the 2 cohorts (-2.46 vs -2.34 points; P = .75). The P value for interaction was .02, thereby meeting the threshold criteria of the current study. Similar findings were evident for other pain-related patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, obese patients with AIMSS obtained more analgesic benefit from duloxetine compared with nonobese patients. Additional studies are warranted to determine the biologic basis for these findings.

Una Mano Amiga: Pilot Test of a Patient Navigator Program for Southwest New Mexico.

We conducted a pilot test of a patient navigation intervention (Una Mano Amiga) to address cancer health disparities in three rural counties in southwest New Mexico. We trained two bilingual lay health workers (promotoras) as patient navigators (PNs) to help adult cancer patients and their participating families in Grant, Luna, and Hidalgo counties "navigate" the health care system, including appropriate access to social and financial services. Our hypothesized outcome was a reduction in time from diagnosis to treatment initiation compared to the average time without PNs in each of the three counties (2000-2009). We enrolled 85 eligible patients and 43 eligible family members who had completed psychosocial and demographic forms in this PN intervention. Mean time from cancer diagnosis to treatment initiation among 41 study patients was 59.6 days across the three counties. Mean time from non-intervention comparison data was 47.1 days. In the intervention group, on a 0-10 satisfaction scale (higher = more), patient mean scores for three items ranged from 9.3 to 9.6, family members, 8.9-9.3. Caregiver stress as measured by a Caregiver Self-Assessment score ≥ 10 (highest stress = 16) decreased from 23.8% of caregivers at study entry to 14.3% at follow-up (not statistically significantly different). Although the PN intervention did not decrease time from diagnosis to treatment initiation compared to three comparison counties, positive reactions of patients and family members support further research with larger samples.

Moving forward toward standardizing analysis of quality of life data in randomized cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of consensus on how health-related quality of life and other patient-reported outcome measures in cancer randomized clinical trials are analyzed and interpreted. This makes it difficult to compare results across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) synthesize scientific research, and use that evidence to inform product labeling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data for Cancer Clinical Trials (SISAQOL) Consortium aims to develop guidelines and recommendations to standardize analyses of patient-reported outcome data in cancer RCTs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Members from the SISAQOL Consortium met in January 2017 to discuss relevant issues. Data from systematic reviews of the current state of published research in patient-reported outcomes in cancer RCTs indicated a lack of clear reporting of research hypothesis and analytic strategies, and inconsistency in definitions of terms, including "missing data,""health-related quality of life," and "patient-reported outcome." Based on the meeting proceedings, the Consortium will focus on three key priorities in the coming year: developing a taxonomy of research objectives, identifying appropriate statistical methods to analyze patient-reported outcome data, and determining best practices to evaluate and deal with missing data. CONCLUSION: The quality of the Consortium guidelines and recommendations are informed and enhanced by the broad Consortium membership which includes regulators, patients, clinicians, and academics.

Two-Year Trends of Taxane-Induced Neuropathy in Women Enrolled in a Randomized Trial of Acetyl-L-Carnitine (SWOG S0715).

Background: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and disabling side effect of taxanes. Acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC) was unexpectedly found to increase CIPN in a randomized trial. We investigated the long-term patterns of CIPN among patients in this trial. Methods: S0715 was a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial comparing ALC (1000 mg three times a day) with placebo for 24 weeks in women undergoing adjuvant taxane-based chemotherapy for breast cancer. CIPN was measured by the 11-item neurotoxicity (NTX) component of the FACT-Taxane scale at weeks 12, 24, 36, 52, and 104. We examined NTX scores over two years using linear mixed models for longitudinal data. Individual time points were examined using linear regression. Regression analyses included stratification factors and the baseline score as covariates. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Four-hundred nine subjects were eligible for evaluation. Patients receiving ALC had a statistically significantly (P = .01) greater reduction in NTX scores (worse CIPN) of -1.39 points (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.48 to -0.30) than the placebo group. These differences were particularly evident at weeks 24 (-1.68, 95% CI = -3.02 to -0.33), 36 (-1.37, 95% CI = -2.69 to -0.04), and 52 (-1.83, 95% CI = -3.35 to -0.32). At 104 weeks, 39.5% on the ALC arm and 34.4% on the placebo arm reported a five-point (10%) decrease from baseline. For both treatment groups, 104-week NTX scores were statistically significantly different compared with baseline (P < .001). Conclusions: For both groups, NTX scores were reduced from baseline and remained persistently low. Twenty-four weeks of ALC therapy resulted in statistically significantly worse CIPN over two years. Understanding the mechanism of this persistent effect may inform prevention and treatment strategies. Until then, the potential efficacy and harms of commonly used supplements should be rigorously studied.

Randomized, Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Duloxetine Versus Placebo for Aromatase Inhibitor-Associated Arthralgias in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: SWOG S1202.

Purpose Adherence to aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy for early-stage breast cancer is limited by AI-associated musculoskeletal symptoms (AIMSS). Duloxetine is US Food and Drug Administration approved for treatment of multiple chronic pain disorders. We hypothesized that treatment of AIMSS with duloxetine would improve average joint pain compared with placebo. Methods This randomized, double-blind, phase III trial included AI-treated postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer and who had average joint pain score of ≥ 4 out of 10 that developed or worsened since AI therapy initiation. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to duloxetine or placebo for 13 weeks. The primary end point was average joint pain through 12 weeks, examined using multivariable linear mixed models, adjusted for stratification factors (baseline pain score of 4 to 6 v 7 to 10 and prior taxane use). Clinically significant change in average pain was defined as a ≥ 2-point decrease from baseline. Results Of 299 enrolled patients, 127 patients treated with duloxetine and 128 who received placebo were evaluable for the primary analysis. By 12 weeks, the average joint pain score was 0.82 points lower for patients who received duloxetine compared with those who received placebo (95% CI, -1.24 to -0.40; P = .0002). Similar patterns were observed for worst joint pain, joint stiffness, pain interference, and functioning. Rates of adverse events of any grade were higher in the duloxetine-treated group (78% v 50%); rates of grade 3 adverse events were similar. Conclusion Results of treatment with duloxetine for AIMSS were superior to those of placebo among women with early-stage breast cancer, although it resulted in more frequent low-grade toxicities.

United States Population-Based Estimates of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Symptom and Functional Status Reference Values for Individuals With Cancer.

Purpose To estimate cancer population-based reference values in the United States for eight PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) domains by age and stage of disease. Patients and Methods For the Measuring Your Health (MY-Health) study, persons newly diagnosed with cancer (prostate, colorectal, non-small-cell lung, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, breast, uterine, or cervical) from 2010 to 2012 (N = 5,284) were recruited through the National Cancer Institute's SEER Program. Participants were mailed surveys 6 to 13 months after diagnosis. Raking by race/ethnicity, age, and stage generated weighted average PROMIS scores for pain interference, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, physical function, ability to participate in social roles, and cognitive function. PROMIS measures are standardized to a T-score metric, with a score of 50 representing the general US population mean. Clinically meaningful differences were defined as a 3-point difference in scores. Results Several reference values (means) for patients with cancer were worse than the general United States population norms of 50. These include pain interference (52.4), fatigue (52.2), and physical function (44.1). Reference values were highest (ie, showed greatest symptom burden) in lung cancer (pain interference, 55.5; fatigue, 57.3; depression, 51.4) and cervical cancer (anxiety, 53.2; sleep disturbance, 53.4). Reference values for patients age 65 to 84 years reported lower sleep disturbance, anxiety, and depression, and better cognitive function than younger patients. Cancer reference values were poorer among those with advanced disease compared with patients with limited or no evidence of disease, specifically physical function (41.1 v 46.6, respectively), fatigue (55.8 v 50.2, respectively), and pain interference (55.2 v 50.9, respectively). Conclusion In a large, population-based sample of patients with recently diagnosed cancer, we observed symptom severity and functional deficits by age, stage, and cancer type consistent with the expected impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment. These United States cancer reference values can help facilitate interpretation of the PROMIS domain scores in research studies or in clinical applications that measure and evaluate the symptom and functional burden patients with cancer experience after initial treatment.

Patient-reported outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving docetaxel and Atrasentan versus docetaxel and placebo in a randomized phase III clinical trial (SWOG S0421).

Background: SWOG S0421 was a large randomized trial comparing docetaxel/prednisone plus placebo (DPP) to docetaxel/prednisone plus atrasentan over 12 cycles for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The current report presents the PRO results for this trial, an important secondary endpoint. Methods: The trial specified two primary PRO endpoints. Palliation of worst pain was based on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), where a 2 point difference is defined as clinically meaningful. Improvement of functional status was based on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Prostate Cancer Trial Outcome Index (FACT-P TOI); a 5-point difference has been defined as clinically meaningful. We compared rates by arm using chi-square tests. Longitudinal analyses using linear mixed models addressed changes by arm over time. Results: Four-hundred eighty-nine patients on each arm were evaluable for PRO endpoint data. There were no differences by arm in clinically meaningful pain palliation (41.7% for DPP vs. 44.0% for DPA, p = .70) or functional status (24.2% for DPP vs. 28.7% for DPA, p = .13). Longitudinal comparisons indicated no differences over time by arm for BPI Worst Pain scores (0.13 points, p = .23). Patients on the DPA arm had improved functional status of 1.78 points on average, a statistically significant (p = .02) but not clinically meaningful difference. Conclusions: The SWOG S0421 PRO data showed little evidence of clinically meaningful differences by arm in either pain palliation or functional status.

Seven-year follow-up for energy/vitality outcomes in early stage Hodgkin's disease patients treated with subtotal lymphoid irradiation versus chemotherapy plus radiation: SWOG S9133 and its QOL companion study, S9208.

PURPOSE: We describe 7 years of follow-up for the energy/vitality outcome in early-stage Hodgkin's disease patients treated on a randomized clinical trial that compared subtotal lymphoid irradiation (STLI) with combined modality treatment (CMT) (SWOG 9133). Survivorship research questions involved the extent to which symptoms/side effects endured over a follow-up period of 7 years for this early-stage patient group. METHODS: Two hundred thirty-nine patients participated in the quality of life (QOL) companion study (SWOG 9208) and completed the SF-36 vitality scale, SF-36 health perception item, Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-Short Form (CARES-SF), and symptom distress scale. This paper reports vitality outcome results obtained from randomization, 6 months, and annually for 7 years. To assess changes in vitality over time, we used linear mixed models with patient as a random effect. RESULTS: Patients receiving CMT had lower observed vitality at 6 months than did the STLI patients (p < .0001). However, beginning at year 1, vitality results did not differ significantly by treatment over the 5-year (p = .13) and 7-year (p = .16) follow-up periods. Vitality only slightly improved over baseline in either group after treatment. The results were similar after accounting for patterns of recurrence and missing data. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that patients with early-stage Hodgkin's disease experience a short-term (at 6 months) decrease in vitality with treatment, which is more severe with CMT, but that after the first year, vitality scores were similar between the two treatment groups. Enduring fatigue results for patients receiving these therapies were not observed. Implications for cancer survivors These data provide comprehensive 7-year follow-up vitality information, an important symptom for early-stage lymphoma survivors.

The challenge of measuring intra-individual change in fatigue during cancer treatment.

PURPOSE: To evaluate how well three different patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measure individual change. METHODS: Two hundred and fourteen patients (from two sites) initiating first or new chemotherapy for any stage of breast or gastrointestinal cancer participated. The 13-item FACIT Fatigue scale, a 7-item PROMIS® Fatigue Short Form (PROMIS 7a), and the PROMIS® Fatigue computer adaptive test (CAT) were administered monthly online for 6 months. Reliability of measured change was defined, under a population mixed effects model, as the ratio of estimated systematic variance in rate of change to the estimated total variance of measured individual differences in rate of change. Precision of individual measured change, the standard error of measurement of change, was given by the square root of the rate-of-change sampling variance. Linear and quadratic models were examined up to 3 and up to 6 months. RESULTS: A linear model for measured change showed the following by 6 and 3 months, respectively: PROMIS CAT (0.363 and 0.342); PROMIS SF (0.408 and 0.533); FACIT (0.459 and 0.473). Quadratic models offered no noteworthy improvement over linear models. Both reliability and precision results demonstrate the need to improve the measurement of intra-individual change. CONCLUSIONS: These results illustrate the challenge of reliably measuring individual change in fatigue with a level of confidence required for intervention. Optimizing clinically useful measurement of intra-individual differences over time continues to pose a challenge for PROs.

Responsiveness of 8 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was a National Institutes of Health-funded initiative to develop measures of symptoms and function. Responsiveness is the degree to which a measure can detect underlying changes over time. The objective of the current study was to document the responsiveness of 8 PROMIS measures in a large, population-based cancer cohort. METHODS: The Measuring Your Health study recruited 2968 patients who were diagnosed with 1 of 7 cancers between 2010 and 2012 through 4 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. Participants completed a baseline survey (6-13 months after diagnosis) and a 6-month follow-up survey. Changes in 8 PROMIS scores were compared with global ratings of transition, changes in performance status, and clinical events. RESULTS: Measures were responsive to 6-month declines and improvements in performance status with small to large effect sizes (ES) (Cohen d = 0.34-0.71; P < .01). Mean changes and effect sizes were larger for participants who reported declines compared with those who reported improvements. Small-to-medium ES were observed in patients who reported being "a little" worse (d = 0.31-0.56), and medium-to-large ES were observed in those who reported being "a lot" worse (d = 0.53-0.72). Hospitalized participants reported significant score increases, resulting in worsening of pain (d = 0.51), fatigue (d = 0.35), and depression (d = 0.57; all P < .01). Cancer recurrence and progression were associated with smaller increases in pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance (d = 0.22-0.27). CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that all 8 PROMIS measures were sensitive to patient-perceived worsening and improvement and to major clinical events. These findings will be able to inform the design and interpretation of future research studies and clinical initiatives administering PROMIS measures. Cancer 2017;123:327-335. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Dental health status and patient-reported outcomes at baseline in patients participating in the osteonecrosis of the jaw registry study, SWOG S0702.

PURPOSE: SWOG S0702 was a cohort study of patients with cancer with bone metastases due to any cancer. Using baseline data from S0702, this report characterizes the oral health and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: S0702 case report forms captured dental assessment and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data. This analysis compares PRO dental discomfort with selected clinical assessments of dental health. This analysis focuses on the 2294 patients who underwent baseline dental examination prior to study registration, but also reports on the 1235 patients for whom only OHRQol data are available. Dental characteristics including the number of teeth and the presence of gingivitis and periodontal disease were examined for correlation with PRO of oral pain, interference with eating, smiling, speech, or quality of life. RESULTS: The median age of the study participants was 62. Greater than 60% of the 2294 patients with baseline dental assessments had none to mild plaque, calculus, gingivitis, or periodontal disease, suggesting that most of this cohort had good oral hygiene. However, in each of these same categories, approximately 6% had dental findings classified as severe conditions (poor oral hygiene). There was strong evidence that the presence of periodontal disease, gingivitis, and number of teeth was correlated with lower OHRQoL across multiple domains, including pain (mouth or jaw), interference with eating, smiling and speech, and overall quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: This report characterizes the oral health and OHRQoL of patients with advanced bone metastases receiving palliative therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00874211.

Analysing data from patient-reported outcome and quality of life endpoints for cancer clinical trials: a start in setting international standards.

Measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes generate important data in cancer randomised trials to assist in assessing the risks and benefits of cancer therapies and fostering patient-centred cancer care. However, the various ways these measures are analysed and interpreted make it difficult to compare results across trials, and hinders the application of research findings to inform publications, product labelling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. To address these problems, the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data (SISAQOL) initiative has been established. This consortium, directed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was convened to provide recommendations on how to standardise the analysis of HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes data in cancer randomised trials. This Personal View discusses the reasons why this project was initiated, the rationale for the planned work, and the expected benefits to cancer research, patient and provider decision making, care delivery, and policy making.

Phase II studies of two different schedules of dasatinib in bone metastasis predominant metastatic breast cancer: SWOG S0622.

Bone metastases from breast cancer are common, causing significant morbidity. Preclinical data of dasatinib, an oral small molecule inhibitor of multiple oncogenic tyrosine kinases, suggested efficacy in tumor control and palliation of bone metastases in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This clinical trial aimed to determine whether treatment with either of 2 dose schedules of dasatinib results in a progression-free survival (PFS) >50 % at 24 weeks in bone metastasis predominant MBC, to evaluate the toxicity of the 2 dosing regimens, and explore whether treatment results in decreased serum bone turnover markers and patient-reported "worst pain." Subjects with bone metastasis predominant MBC were randomly assigned to either 100 mg of dasatinib once daily, or 70 mg twice daily, with treatment continued until time of disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Planned accrual was 40 patients in each arm. The primary trial endpoint was PFS, defined as time from registration to progression or death due to any cause. Median PFS for all eligible patients (79) was 12.6 weeks (95 % CI 9.1-16.7). Neither cohort met the threshold for further clinical interest. There were no significant differences in PFS by randomized treatment arm (p = 0.85). Toxicity was similar in both cohorts, with no clear trend in serum biomarkers of bone turnover or patient-reported pain. Dasatinib was ineffective in controlling bone-predominant MBC in a patient population, unselected by molecular markers. Further study of dasatinib in breast cancer should not be pursued unless performed in molecularly determined patient subsets, or rational combinations.

Identifying Severe Adverse Event Clusters Using the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

PURPOSE: Exploring the relationships among adverse events is important because those that arise from a common mechanism are amenable to a common intervention, which can improve symptom management, quality of life, and treatment adherence. To date, symptom cluster studies have used patient-reported data, which are not always available in clinical trials. In this study, we proposed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) to identify adverse event clusters because the CTCAE data are collected as standard practice and can therefore be used when patient-reported outcomes are unavailable. METHODS: The CTCAE data from a randomized clinical trial conducted by SWOG that compared docetaxel plus estramustine versus mitoxantrone plus predinsone in patients with advanced prostate cancer were used to identify severe adverse event clusters. A variable based hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted using the CTCAE for the 323 patients who experienced at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event. RESULTS: A total of 109 adverse event types were captured using the CTCAE. Four clusters had moderate associations: nausea, vomiting, and anorexia (n = 35, r = 0.45); joint/bone(myalgia, arthralgia, and arthritis) and muscle weakness (n = 26, r = 0.29); anemia and transfusion (n = 20, r = 0.38); and neutrophils/granulocytes, febrile neutropenia, and leukocytes/lymphopenia (n = 114, r = 0.29). Two clusters had weak associations: fatigue/malaise/lethargy and dehydration (n = 66, r = 0.12); and constipation, infection without neutropenia, and abdominal pain/cramping (n = 35, r = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Several severe adverse event clusters were identified in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Identifying adverse event clusters using CTCAE data from clinical trials is feasible.

Research Priorities, Measures, and Recommendations for Assessment of Tobacco Use in Clinical Cancer Research.

There is strong evidence that cigarette smoking causes adverse outcomes in people with cancer. However, more research is needed regarding those effects and the effects of alternative tobacco products and of secondhand smoke, the effects of cessation (before diagnosis, during treatment, or during survivorship), the biologic mechanisms, and optimal strategies for tobacco dependence treatment in oncology. Fundamentally, tobacco is an important source of variation in clinical treatment trials. Nevertheless, tobacco use assessment has not been uniform in clinical trials. Progress has been impeded by a lack of consensus regarding tobacco use assessment suitable for cancer patients. The NCI-AACR Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Assessment Task Force identified priority research areas and developed recommendations for assessment items and timing of assessment in cancer research. A cognitive interview study was conducted with 30 cancer patients at the NIH Clinical Center to evaluate and improve the measurement items. The resulting Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) includes "Core" items for minimal assessment of tobacco use at initial and follow-up time points, and an "Extension" set. Domains include the following: cigarette and other tobacco use status, intensity, and past use; use relative to cancer diagnosis and treatment; cessation approaches and history; and secondhand smoke exposure. The Task Force recommends that assessment occur at study entry and, at a minimum, at the end of protocol therapy in clinical trials. Broad adoption of the recommended measures and timing protocol, and pursuit of the recommended research priorities, will help us to achieve a clearer understanding of the significance of tobacco use and cessation for cancer patients.

Measuring social function in diverse cancer populations: Evaluation of measurement equivalence of the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities short form.

Conceptual and psychometric measurement equivalence of self-report questionnaires are basic requirements for valid cross-cultural and demographic subgroup comparisons. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric measurement equivalence of a 10-item PROMIS® Social Function short form in a diverse population-based sample of cancer patients obtained through the Measuring Your Health (MY-Health) study (n = 5,301). Participants were cancer survivors within six to 13 months of a diagnosis of one of seven cancer types, and spoke English, Spanish, or Mandarin Chinese. They completed a survey on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and health status. Psychometric measurement equivalence was evaluated with an item response theory approach to differential item functioning (DIF) detection and impact. Although an expert panel proposed that many of the 10 items might exhibit measurement bias, or DIF, based on gender, age, race/ethnicity, and/or education, no DIF was detected using the study's standard DIF criterion, and only one item in one sample comparison was flagged for DIF using a sensitivity DIF criterion. This item's flagged DIF had only a trivial impact on estimation of scores. Social function measures are especially important in cancer because the disease and its treatment can affect the quality of marital relationships, parental responsibilities, work abilities, and social activities. Having culturally relevant, linguistically equivalent and psychometrically sound patient-reported measures in multiple languages helps to overcome some common barriers to including underrepresented groups in research and to conducting cross-cultural research.

The Complementary Nature of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Adverse Event Reporting in Cooperative Group Oncology Clinical Trials: A Pooled Analysis (NCCTG N0591).

CONTEXT: Clinical trials use clinician-graded adverse events (AEs) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to describe symptoms. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine the agreement between PROs and AEs in the clinical trial setting. METHODS: Patient-level data were pooled from seven North Central Cancer Treatment Group, two Southwest Oncology Group, and three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group lung studies that included both PROs and AE data. Ten-point changes (on a 0-100 scale) in PRO scores were considered clinically significant differences (CSDs). PRO score changes were compared to AE grade (Gr) categories (2+ yes vs. no and 3+ yes vs. no) using Wilcoxon rank-sum or two-sample t-tests between Gr categories. Incidence rates and concordance of CSD in PRO scores and AE Gr categories were compiled. Spearman correlations were computed between PRO scores and AE severity. RESULTS: PROs completed by patients (n = 1013) were the Uniscale, Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L), Symptom Distress Scale, and/or Functional Living Index-Cancer. Significantly worse PRO score changes were found for the FACT-L in patients with Gr 2+ AEs. Worse scores were seen for the Uniscale for patients with Gr 2+ AEs (P = 0.07) and LCSS for patients with Gr 3+ AEs (P = 0.09). Agreement between incidence of any Gr 2+ (Gr 3+) AE and a CSD in PROs ranged from 27% to 67% (36%-61%). Correlations between PRO scores and AE severity were low: -0.06 Uniscale, -0.03 LCSS, 0.10 FACT-L, -0.11 Symptom Distress Scale, and -0.51 Functional Living Index-Cancer. CONCLUSION: These results support previous work and an a priori hypothesis that AEs and PROs measure differing aspects of the disease experience and are complementary.

Randomized Multicenter Placebo-Controlled Trial of Omega-3 Fatty Acids for the Control of Aromatase Inhibitor-Induced Musculoskeletal Pain: SWOG S0927.

PURPOSE: Musculoskeletal symptoms are the most common adverse effects of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) and can result in decreased quality of life and discontinuation of therapy. Omega-3 fatty acids (O3-FAs) can be effective in decreasing arthralgia resulting from rheumatologic conditions and reducing serum triglycerides. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with early-stage breast cancer receiving an AI who had a worst joint pain/stiffness score ≥ 5 of 10 using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) were randomly assigned to receive either O3-FAs 3.3 g or placebo (soybean/corn oil) daily for 24 weeks. Clinically significant change was defined as ≥ 2-point drop from baseline. Patients also completed quality-of-life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptoms) and additional pain/stiffness assessments at baseline and weeks 6, 12, and 24. Serial fasting blood was collected for lipid analysis. RESULTS: Among 262 patients registered, 249 were evaluable, with 122 women in the O3-FA arm and 127 in the placebo arm. Compared with baseline, the mean observed BPI-SF score decreased by 1.74 points at 12 weeks and 2.22 points at 24 weeks with O3-FAs and by 1.49 and 1.81 points, respectively, with placebo. In a linear regression adjusting for the baseline score, osteoarthritis, and taxane use, adjusted 12-week BPI-SF scores did not differ by arm (P = .58). Triglyceride levels decreased in patients receiving O3-FA treatment and remained the same for those receiving placebo (P = .01). No between-group differences were seen for HDL, LDL, or C-reactive protein. CONCLUSION: We found a substantial (> 50%) and sustained improvement in AI arthralgia for both O3-FAs and placebo but found no meaningful difference between the groups.